Are You Really a Bigot?

The Other McCain addresses the sure-to-earn-backlash behavior of militant homosexual "marriage" advocates, and offers background.

Seizing on the triumphant narrative of the black civil-rights movement, liberals adopted the habit of framing political debates in terms of minority "rights" versus majority "discrimination." That this tactic involves a species of moral and emotional blackmail should be obvious. To disagree with a liberal, to oppose his latest policy proposal, is to invite comparisons to Bull Connor and Orval Faubus, so long as the liberal can make "rights" the basis of his argument.

"Rights talk" allowed liberals a means of preemptively delegitimizing their opponents and thereby to avoid arguing about policy in terms of necessity, utility and efficacy. If all legal and political conflicts are about "rights," there is no need to argue about the specific consequences of laws and policies. Merely determine which side of the controversy represents "rights" and the debate ends there

Of course, the right NOT to be called a bigot does not exist under this regime. Anyhoo,

Tolerance, safety and freedom are not the same as equality, however, and equality is the freight that liberals seek to smuggle into arguments via "rights talk." Gay activists do not construe their "rights" in terms of liberty, but in terms of radical and absolute equality. They insist that same-sex relationships are identical to -- entirely analogous to and fungible with -- traditional marriage.

The upshot: "rights-talk" in absentia Dei will be successful. IOW, without God, anything is permissible, as more than a few bright folks have observed. And of course, that path leads to madness--either accept anarchy or the Oceania of Orwell. There is no third alternative.